गोविन्द भाष्य (श्रील बलदेव विद्याभूषण - अचिन्त्यभेदाभेद वेदान्त ब्रह्मसूत्र भाष्य सटीक)

Adhikaraṇa 1
The Lord Should Be Sought
Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Viṣaya (the subject to be discussed): To understand the Lord's qualities one
should search all the texts of the Vedas.
Saṁśaya (doubt): Should one learn about the Supreme by studying the branch
(śākha) of Vedic texts in one's own community, or should one study all the
branches of the Vedas?
Pūrvapakṣa (the opponent speaks): Because all the branches of the Vedas are
different, one should study only one's own branch of the Vedas.
Siddhānta (conclusion): In the following words the author of the sūtras gives
His conclusion:
Sūtra 1
sarva-vedānta-pratyayaṁ codanādy-aviśeṣāt
sarva—all; veda—Vedas; anta—end; pratyayam—meaning; codana—
injunctions; ādi—beginning with; aviśeṣāt—because of not being different.
Because the Vedic injunctions and all other sources of real knowledge are not
genuinely different, therefore knowledge of Him is the conclusion of all the Vedas.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The word "anta" (end) here means "conclusion". The word "anta" is also used
in this way in Bhagavad-gītā (2.16):
ubhayor api dṛṣṭo 'ntaḥ
"This they have concluded by studying the nature of both."*

Thus knowledge of the Supreme Personality of Godhead is the final conclusion
taught by all the Vedas. Why is that? The sūtra explains: "because the Vedic
injunctions and all other sources of real knowledge are not genuinely different."
The "other sources of real knowledge" here refers to logic. In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka
Upaniṣad (1.4.7) it is said:
ātmety evopāsīta
"One should worship the Supreme."
These words, as well as the promptings of logic, confirm the truth that these
statements and many others like them in passages of all the Vedas, all describe the
same Supreme Lord. The same Supreme Lord is described in the same way in the
Kaṇva, Mādhyandina, and other recensions of the Vedas.
Here someone may object: In one part of the Vedas (Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad
3.9.28) it is said:
vijñānam ānandam brahma
"The Supreme is knowledge and bliss."
However, in another part of the Vedas (Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad 1.1.9) it is said:
yaḥ sarva-jñaḥ sarva-vit
"The Supreme knows everything."
Because in this way each branch of the Vedas speaks differently of the Supreme,
they do not all describe the same object as the Supreme.
If this is said, the author of the sūtras gives the following reply.
Sūtra 2
bhedād iti cen naikasyām api
bhedāt—because of difference; iti—thus; cet—if; na—not; ekasyām—in one;
api—also.

If it is said, "because they are different," then I reply, "It is not so, for it is also
in one".
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
It is not so. That is so because these differences are seen even within the same
branch of the Vedas. An example of this is the Taittirīya Upaniṣad, which gives the
following two statements.
satyaṁ jñānam anantaṁ brahma
"The limitless Supreme is both knowledge and truth."
ānando brahma
"The Supreme is bliss."
In this way the many different branches of the Vedas describe the same form
of the Supreme Lord. They do not contradict each other at all.
Sūtra 3
svādhyāyasya tathātvena hi samācāre 'dhikārāc ca
svādhyāyasya—of Vedic study; tathātvena—by being so; hi—indeed;
samācāre—in Vedic rituals; adhikārāt—because of being qualified; ca—also.
Because of being qualified to study the Vedas and to perform rituals.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
In the Taittirīya Āraṇyaka (2.15) it is said:

svādhyāyo 'dhyetavyaḥ
"One should study the Vedas."
In this way one is ordered to study all the Vedas. In the Smṛti-śāstra it is said:
vedaḥ kṛtsno 'dhigantavyaḥ sa-rahasyo dvijanmanā
"A brāhmaṇa should study the entire Veda, including even its confidential
portions."
The word "samācāre" in this sūtra means "because all are qualified to perform
all pious rituals". The Smṛti-śāstra confirms this in the following words:
sarva-vedokta-mārgeṇa
karma kurvīta nityaśaḥ
ānando hi phalaṁ yasmāc
chākhā-bhedo hy aśakti-jaḥ
sarva-karma-kṛtau yasmād
aśaktāḥ sarva-jantavaḥ
śākhā-bhedaṁ karma-bhedaṁ
vyāsas tasmād aciklpad
"Following the path of all the Vedas, one should regularly perform pious
rituals. Bliss is the result attained by this. The Veda was divided into different
branches because the people were not able to perform all the pious deeds described
in the Veda. That is why Vyāsa divided the Veda into many branches and the one
collection of pious rituals into many collections."
Therefore, if a person is able to do so, he may understand the Supreme by
performing all the spiritual practices described in all the branches of the Vedas. In
the next sūtra the author gives an example of indirect reasoning leading to the
same conclusion.
Sūtra 4
sava-vac ca tan niyamaḥ
sava—yajñas; vat—like; ca—and; tat—that; niyamaḥ—rule.

That rule is like the yajñas.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The "savas" here are the seven yajñas beginning with the saurya-yajña and
ending with the śataudana-yajña which, because they are performed with only one
fire, may be performed only by the followers of the Atharva Veda. The worship of
the Supreme Lord, however, can performed by the followers of all the Vedas.
The word "salila-vat" (like water) is an alternate reading of the first word in this
sūtra. If this reading is accepted, then the sūtra means, "As all waters flow, without
restriction, into the sea, so all the statements of the Vedas describe, as much as
they have the power, the Supreme Personality of Godhead." In the Agni Purāṇa it
is said:
yathā nadīnāṁ salilaṁ
śaktyā sāgaratāṁ vrajet
evaṁ sarvāṇi vākyāni
puṁ-śaktyā brahma-vittaye
"As the water of rivers, as far as it has the power, always enters the sea, so all
words, as far as their speaker has the power, should be employed to understand
the Supreme Lord."
Sūtra 5
darśayati ca
darśayati—reveals; ca—also.
It also reveals it.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
In the Kaṭha Upaniṣad (1.2.15) it is said:

sarve vedā yat-padam āmananti
"All the Vedas describe the Supreme Personality of Godhead."
This means that the Supreme Lord is known by all the Vedas, or, in other
words, the Vedas reveal the truth of Lord Hari. The word "ca" (and) in this sūtra
hints, "as far as one has the power". They who have the power may worship the
Supreme Lord by performing the pious rituals described in all the branches of the
Vedas. They who do not have the power must worship the Supreme Lord by
performing the pious rituals described in their own community's branch of the
Vedas. The conclusion is that the Supreme Lord is the final object of knowledge
sought by all the branches of the Vedas. This truth was also described in the very
beginning of Vedānta-sūtra (1.1.4):
tat tu samanvayāt
"But that (Lord Viṣṇu is the sole topic of discussion in the Vedas) is confirmed
by all scriptures."
This truth is thus repeated here in the discussion of the properness of studying
the different qualities of the Supreme Lord. Because this repetition strengthens the
argument here, there is no fault in it.
Adhikaraṇa 2
The Lord's Qualities Are Described in Many Scriptures
Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Now the author of the sūtras will show that the many qualities of the Lord may
be understood by studying all the Vedas. For example, in the Atharva Veda's
Gopāla-tāpanī Upaniṣad (1.8), the Supreme Lord is described as a cowherd boy
dark like a tamāla tree, dressed in yellow garments, decorated with a Kaustubha
jewel, wearing a peacock-feather, playing graceful melodies on a flute, and
surrounded by gopas, gopīs, and surabhi cows. There He is the Deity of Gokula. In
the Rāma-tāpanī Upaniṣad, however, He is described as the Lord whose left side is
decorated by Jānakī-devī, holding a bow, the killer of Rāvaṇa and a host of
demons, and the king of Ayodhyā. In the Rāma-tāpanī Upaniṣad it is said:

prakṛtyā sahitaḥ śyāmaḥ
pīta-vāsā jaṭā-dharaḥ
dvi-bhujaḥ kuṇḍalī ratna-
mālī dhīro dhanur-dharaḥ
"Decorated with earrings and a jewel necklace, His complexion dark, His
garments yellow, and the hair on His head matted, saintly, two-armed Lord Rāma
is accompanied by Goddess Sītā."
In the scriptures the Lord's form as Nṛsiṁha is described as having a
frightening face and filling His enemies with fear. The word "bhīṣaṇa"
(frightening), which occurs in Lord Nṛsiṁha's mantra, is explained in the
following words of the Nṛsiṁha-tāpanī Upaniṣad:
atha kasmād ucyate bhīṣaṇam iti. yasmād yasya rūpaṁ dṛṣṭvā sarve lokāḥ sarve
devāḥ sarvāṇi bhūtāni bhītyā palāyante svayaṁ yataḥ kutaścin na bibheti.
bhīṣāsmād vātaḥ pavate bhīṣodeti sūryaḥ. bhīṣāsmād agniś cendraś ca mṛtyur
dhāvati pañcamaḥ.
"Why is the Lord called frightening? Because when all the demigods, all the
worlds, and all living entities see His form, they all flee in fear. He fears no one.
Out of fear of Him the wind blows and the sun rises. Out of fear of Him fire, the
moon, and death all flee."
The Lord's form as Trivikrama is described in the Ṛg Veda (1.154.1):
viṣṇor nu kaṁ vīryāṇi pravocaṁ
yaḥ pārthivāni vimame rajāṁsi
yo askambhayad uttaraṁ sadhasthaṁ
vicakramāṇas tredhorugāya
"How can I describe all the glories and powers of Lord Viṣṇu, who created the
heaven and earth, established the worlds above and below, and with three steps
passed over all the worlds?"
Therefore, like the yajñas, which are different because they are offered to
different demigods, so the method of worship to be offered to the different forms
of the Supreme Lord are all different because the qualities of the Lord's different
forms are different.
Saṁśaya (doubt): Should the Śruti-śāstra's description of the Lord's qualities in
one kind of worship be added in another kind of worship, or not?

Pūrvapakṣa (the opponent speaks): The Śruti-śāstra's description of the Lord's
qualities in one passage should be heard. One should not mix that description
with other descriptions of the Lord in other passages.
Siddhānta (conclusion): In the following words the author of the sūtras gives
His conclusion.
Sūtra 6
upasaṁhāro 'rthābhedād vidhi-śeṣa-vat samāne ca
upasaṁhāraḥ—combination; artha—of meaning; abhedāt—because of non-
difference; vidhi—of duties; śeṣa—remainder; vat-like; samāne—in being the
same; ca—also.
In what is common there may be combination, for the meaning is not different.
This is like what is appropriate for the rules and regulations.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The word "ca" (and) is used here for limitation. When the method of worship
is the same, when the pure Supreme Personality of Godhead is the object of
worship, and

गोपालतापनी उपनिषद् में कहा गया है:
एकोऽपि सन् बहुधा योऽवभाति ।
"यद्यपि वे एक हैं, तथापि अनेक रूपों में प्रकाशित होते हैं।"
इस प्रसंग में भगवान् रामचन्द्र तथा अन्य अवतारों के रूपों को
भगवान् श्रीकृष्ण के ध्यान में समाहित किया गया है।
श्रीमद्भागवत में भगवान् श्रीकृष्ण के प्रति कहा गया है:
नमस्ते रघुवर्याय
रावणान्तकराय च ॥
"रघुश्रेष्ठ तथा रावण का वध करने वाले आपको नमस्कार है।"
ऐसे अनेक अन्य वचन उद्धृत किये जा सकते हैं जो उन ध्यानों को दर्शाते हैं जहाँ
भगवान् के विभिन्न रूपों के वर्णनों को एक साथ लाया गया है।
यहाँ पूर्वपक्ष (आपत्ति): बृहदारण्यक उपनिषद् (१.४.७) में कहा गया है:
आत्मेत्येवोपासीत ।
"परमात्मा के रूप में ही उपासना करनी चाहिए।"
अतः केवल एक ही रूप की उपासना करनी चाहिए और उपासना की अपनी पद्धति में
अन्य रूपों का समावेश नहीं करना चाहिए।
यदि ऐसा कहा जाए, तो सूत्रकार (सिद्धान्त रूप में) निम्नलिखित उत्तर देते हैं:
॥ सूत्रम् ७ ॥
अन्यथात्वं शब्दादिति चेन्नाविशेषात् ॥
अन्यथात्वम् — अन्यथा (भेद), शब्दात् — श्रुतिशास्त्र के कारण, इति चेत् — यदि ऐसा कहें,
न — तो ऐसा नहीं है, अविशेषात् — (भगवद्रूपों में) विशेष भेद न होने के कारण।
यदि कोई कहे कि "श्रुति-शास्त्र के कारण ऐसा अन्यथात्व (भेद) है", तो उत्तर है "ऐसा नहीं है..."

not so, for there is nothing specific".
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
If someone claims that Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (1.4.7) refutes the idea of thus
bringing together the Lord's qualities, then I reply: No. It is not so. Why not? The
sūtra explains: "for there is nothing specific". This means that no scriptural
passage declares, "the Lord's qualities should not be worshiped together." The
word "eva" (indeed) in Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (1.4.7) means that one should
not worship what is not the Supreme Lord. It does not mean that the Lord's
qualities can not be worshiped together. If it is said, "The king alone is seen", that
does not mean that the king's royal parasol and other royal paraphernalia were
absent. It is said:
tasmād yathā-śakti-guṇāś cintyāḥ
"Therefore, as far as one is able, one should meditate on the Lord's various
transcendental qualities."
In this way it is proved that one may bring together the various qualities of the
Lord.
As a vaidūrya jewel manifests many different colors, so the Supreme Lord
manifests many different forms. Each of these forms is the same perfect, complete,
and pure Supreme Lord. In some forms the Lord displays all His qualities, and
other forms the Lord does not display all His qualities. Therefore a wise devotee
may meditate on all the Lord qualities, as described in the scriptures, as being
present in the particular form of the Lord that is chosen for worship.
Adhikaraṇa 3
The Ekāntī Devotees Do Not Meditate On All the Lord's Qualities
Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Although they are learned in the many branches of the Vedas, still the ekāntī
devotees meditate only the Lord's qualities as revealed in their own Upaniṣads,
which they have carefully studied. Even though they are aware of other qualities,
they do not meditate on them. In this way there is an exception to what was
previously described.

Viṣaya (the subject matter): The subject matter here is a passage of Gopāla-
tāpanī Upaniṣad.
Saṁśaya (doubt): In the worship performed by the ekāntī devotees, should all
the qualities of the Supreme Lord be brought together or not?
Pūrvapakṣa (the opponent speaks): Because the Lord's qualities are to be
praised, the ekāntī devotees should meditate in this way, if they are able.
Siddhānta (conclusion): In the following words the author of the sūtras gives
His conclusion.
Sūtra 8
na vā prakaraṇa-bhedāt parovarīyastvādi-vat
na—not; vā—or; prakaraṇa—of devotion; bhedāt—because of differences;
parovarīyastva—greater than the greatest; ādi—beginning with; vat—like.
Certainly not. Because of the differences in devotion. Like the Parovarīya and
others.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The word "vā" (or) is used in the sense of “certainly". The ekāntī devotees do
not bring the qualities of the Lord's other forms into the specific form they have
selected to worship. In this way the ekāntī devotees who are exclusively devoted to
Lord Kṛṣṇa do not think of Lord Nṛsiṁha's mane, teeth, fearsomeness, and other
qualities as present in Lord Kṛṣṇa. In the same way the ekāntī devotees who are
exclusively devoted to Lord Nṛsiṁha do not think of Lord Kṛṣṇa's flute, stick,
peacock-feather, and other qualities as present in Lord Nṛsiṁha. Why is that? The
sūtra explains: “prakaraṇa-bhedāt" (because of the differences in devotion). The
word "prakaraṇa" here means "the most exalted (pra) activity (karaṇa)."
Therefore the word “prakaraṇa" here refers to devotional service. The word
“bhedāt" here means "because of the differences".
Because it is more intense and deep, the devotion of the ekaṇtī devotees is more
exalted than the devotion of the svaniṣṭha devotees. Here the author of the sūtras
gives and example. He says: "Like the Parovarīya and others." This means that the
ekāntī devotees who are exclusively devoted to the Lord's form as the Hiraṇya
Puruṣa in the sun planet do not ascribe to their object of worship the qualities of
the Lord's form as Parovarīya, a form worshiped by the worshipers of Udgītha. The

word Parovarīya means "greater than the greatest". The example here is of the
worshipers of Ugītha in relation to Parovarīya.
Here someone may object: Is it not so that the ekāntīs and svaniṣṭhas are both
called devotees of the Lord and therefore they must both meditate on all the Lord's
qualities just as they who call themselves brāhmaṇas must all meditate on the
Gāyatrī-mantra?
If this is said, then the author of the sūtras gives the following reply.
Sūtra 9
saṁjñātaś cet tad uktam asti tu tad api
saṁjñātaḥ—by the name; cet—if; tat—that; uktam—spoken; asti—is; tu—but;
tat—that; api—also.
If it is because of the name, then I reply, "But it was already said. That also."
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The word "tu" (but) is employed here to dispel doubt. If it is said that all who
worship the Supreme must meditate on all His qualities, then the answer was
already given in the previous sūtra. The answer is, "Certainly not. Because of the
differences in devotion." Although they are certainly included in the general
category of the Lord's devotees, the ekāntīs are the best of the devotees, and
therefore they do not meditate on all the qualities of the Lord. If it were otherwise
then they would not be the best of the devotees. Because the ekāntī devotees are
passionately devoted to one particular form of the Lord, they are superior to the
svaniṣṭha devotees who are in a general way devoted to all the forms of the Lord.
Also, even the svaniṣṭha devotees are not able to meditate on every single one of
the Lord's qualities. In the Ṛg Veda (1.154.1) it is said:
viṣṇor nu kaṁ vīryāṇi pravocaṁ
"How can I describe all the glories and powers of Lord Viṣṇu?"
In the Smṛti-śāstra it is said:

नान्तं गुणानामगुणस्य जग्मुर्
योगेश्वरा ये भवपाद्ममुख्याः।
"ब्रह्मा, शिव, देवगण तथा योगेश्वर भी प्राकृत गुणों से अतीत
भगवान् के दिव्य गुणों का अन्त नहीं पा सके।"
सूत्र व्याख्या करता है, "अस्ति" (है), जिसका यहाँ अर्थ है, "सभी भक्त
केवल 'भक्त' नाम धारण करने के कारण सर्वथा एकसमान हैं—यह विचार
'हेतोरन्वयव्यभिचार' नामक हेत्वाभास (तार्किक दोष) है।" जिस प्रकार भगवान् के परोवरीय
स्वरूप के उपासक तथा हिरण्मय स्वरूप के उपासक दोनों ही उद्गीथ के
उपासक माने जाने पर भी भगवान् के विषय में भिन्न धारणाएँ रखते हैं,
उसी प्रकार स्वनिष्ठ और एकान्ती भक्तों की भी भगवान् के विषय में
भिन्न धारणाएँ होती हैं; स्वनिष्ठ भक्त भगवान् के समस्त गुणों का
ध्यान करते हैं तथा एकान्ती भक्त केवल अपने अभीष्ट-उपास्य रूप के
गुणों का ही ध्यान करते हैं। यही इन दोनों अधिकरणों का सिद्धान्त-निष्कर्ष है।
अधिकरण ४
भगवान् का बाल्य एवं यौवन
श्रील बलदेव विद्याभूषण द्वारा अवतरणिका
अब सूत्रकार भगवान् की बाल्यावस्था आदि के गुणों के ध्यान में
उपसंहार (संग्रह) के विषय में विचार आरम्भ करते हैं। गोपालतापनी उपनिषद् में
कहा गया है:
कृष्णाय देवकीनन्दनाय ॐ तत् सत्। भूर्भुवः स्वस्तस्मै वै नमो नमः।
"ॐ तत् सत्। भूर्भुवः स्वः। देवकीनन्दन भगवान् श्रीकृष्ण को नमस्कार है।"
नाम-कौमुदीकार 'कृष्ण' शब्द का लक्षण इस प्रकार करते हैं:
कृष्णशब्दस्तु तमालनीलत्विषि यशोदास्तनन्धये रूढिः।
"कृष्ण शब्द का अर्थ है: यशोदा के स्तनन्धय (शिशु) पुत्र, जो तमाल वृक्ष के समान श्यामवर्ण हैं।"

In the Rāma-tāpanī Upaniṣad it is said:
oṁ cin-maye 'smin mahā-viṣṇau
jāte dāśarathe harau
raghoḥ kule 'khilaṁ rāti
rājate yo mahī-sthitaḥ
"Oṁ. Born as Daśaratha's son in King Raghu's dynasty, the spiritual Supreme
Personality of Godhead, who is known as Mahā-Viṣṇu and Hari, was splendidly
manifested on the earth. He delighted everyone."
In this way the Śruti-śāstra describes the qualities of the Supreme Lord in His
childhood and other ages. Many similar descriptions are also found in the Smṛti-
śāstra.
Saṁśaya (Doubt): Should one meditate on these descriptions of the Lord in His
childhood and other ages, or should one not meditate on them?
Pūrvapakṣa (the opponent speaks): One should not meditate on the form of the
Lord in His different ages, for then the Lord's form would be sometimes large and
sometimes small. This would contradict the Śruti-śāstra's advice that in one's
meditation the features of the Lord should be harmonious.
Siddhānta (conclusion): In the following words the author of the sūtras gives
His conclusion.
Sūtra 10
vyāpteś ca samañjasam
vyāpteḥ—becasue of being all-pervading; ca—also; samañjasam—proper.
It is proper because He is all-pervading and for other reasons also.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
It is proper to meditate on the Lord in His childhood and other ages because
the Lord is all-pervading and because the Lord is not limited to His features in His
different ages. In sūtra 3.2.38 the Lord's all-pervasiveness was confirmed. The

Lord's so-called "birth" is not in reality a change of condition for Him. In the
Puruṣa-sūkta prayer it is said:
ajāyamāno bahudhā vijāyate
"Although He is never born, the Lord takes birth again and again in many
different forms."
Therefore the word "birth" here means "the appearance of the Supreme Lord,
who never really takes birth." The word "ca" (also) in this sūtra means, "also
because He is the reservoir of transcendental mellows." This is confirmed in the
Taittirīya Upaniṣad (2.7.1):
raso vai saḥ
"The Supreme Personality of Godhead is the reservoir of transcendental
mellows."*
By His inconceivable potency, the Supreme Lord appears in a particular form
appropriate to the mellows and pastimes His devotees desire. This is perfectly
proper. The Lord has numberless devotees, beginning with the liberated souls.
This is described in the Ṛg Veda (1.22.20):
tad viṣṇoḥ paramaṁ padaṁ
sadā paśyanti sūrayaḥ
"The wise and learned devotees always see the supreme abode of Lord Viṣṇu."*
The Supreme Lord, who is always one, simultaneously appears in His different
ages before His different devotees. Something similar is seen in Bṛhad-āraṇyaka
Upaniṣad (5.2.1-3), where the syllable "da" was interpreted in three ways by the
demigods, human beings, and demons. In this way, because the Supreme Lord is
all-pervading and because the Lord always remains one, one should certainly
meditate on the Lord's pastimes of childhood and other ages.
Adhikaraṇa 5
The Lord's Activities Are Eternal

Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Pūrvapakṣa (the opponent speaks): Because the Supreme Lord is by nature
eternal, it may be said that His activities performed with His associates in His
childhood and other ages are also eternal. In this way His many different activities,
from beginning to end, may all be considered to be eternal. However, it is illogical
to say that there can be an eternal previous action that is followed by another
action. If the previous action is followed by a subsequent action, then the
eternality of the previous action is destroyed. If one action is eternal then any
subsequent action must be performed by a different person. To say that the
subsequent action is performed by the same person contradicts both scripture and
direct experience. Every action has a beginning and an end. Without beginning
and end no action can be brought to completion, and without such beginnings and
ends there can be no experience of the nectar of transcendental mellows (rasa).
For these reasons, how can it be possible that the Lord's activities are eternal? If
the Lord's activities were eternal they would be still and unchanging, like a painted
picture. If it is said that the same actions are repeated again and again and in that
way they are eternal, then I say that there are bound to be times when the
beginning of the action is different, and thus the subsequent actions will become
changed, and the action would then not be repeated in the same way as before.
Therefore, how can it be that the activities of the Lord are eternal? Therefore it
should not be accepted that the activities of the Lord are eternal.
Siddhānta (conclusion): In the following words the author of the sūtras gives
His reply to this idea.
Sūtra 11
sarvābhedād anyatreme
sarva—all; abhedāt—because of non-difference; anyatra—in another place;
ime—they.
Because of complete non-difference they are in another place.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Both Lord Hari and His associates are the same persons in both previous and
subsequent actions. Why is that? The sūtra explains: "sarvābhedād" (because of

complete non-difference). This means that because there is no difference in Their
personalities, the same Lord Hari and the same associates present in the previous
actions are also present in the subsequent actions. That Lord Hari remains one
even though He expands into many forms is confirmed in the Gopāla-tāpanī
Upaniṣad in these words:
eko 'pi san bahudhā yo 'vabhāti
"Although He is one, the Supreme Lord appears in many forms."
Also, in the Smṛti-śāstra it is said:
ekāneka-svarūpāya
"Although He is one, the Supreme Lord appears in many forms."
This is also true of the Lord's liberated associates, who remain one even though
they appear in many forms. In the Bhūma-vidyā (Chāndogya Upaniṣad 7.26.2) this
is said of the liberated souls. In the Smṛti-śāstra this is also said in the description
of the Lord's marriage with many princesses and in other pastimes also. In this
way the Lord and the liberated souls can, retaining Their identities, expand
themselves to be present eternally in different places in time. The sentence "It was
twice-cooked" is understood by an intelligent person to mean that one thing was
cooked twice, not that two separate foods were separately cooked. In the same way
the sentence, "He called out the word `cow' twice," means that one cow was
addressed twice, not that two cows were addressed. In this way Lord Hari, His
eternal associates, and His transcendental abodes all retain their identities even
though they are manifested in many different places and perform activities that are
all eternal even though their activities have a beginning and an end. In this way it
is said that a wonderful variety of transcendental mellows are manifested by this
sequence of eternal events. It is not that these ideas do not have their root in the
descriptions of scripture. In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (3.8.3) it is said:
yad bhūtaṁ bhavac ca bhaviṣyac ca
"The Supreme Personality of Godhead exists in the past, present, and future."
In the Atharva Veda it is said:
eko devo nitya-līlānuraktaḥ

"The one Supreme Personality of Godhead is eternally engaged in many, many
transcendental forms in relationships with His unalloyed devotees."*
The Supreme Lord Himself affirms (Bhagavad-gītā 4.9):
janma karma ca me divyam
"One who knows the transcendental nature of My appearance and activities
does not, upon leaving the body, take his birth again in this material world, but
attains My eternal abode, O Arjuna."*
Only a person who has attained the Supreme Lord's mercy can understand and
accept all of this, as the Supreme Lord Himself declares (Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam
2.9.32):
yāvān ahaṁ yathā-bhāvo
yad-rūpa-guṇa-karmakaḥ
tathaiva tattva-vijñānam
astu te mad-anugrahāt
"All of Me, namely My actual eternal form and My transcendental existence,
color, qualities, and activities, let all be awakened within you by factual realization,
out of My causeless mercy."*
In this way it is proved that the Lord's activities are eternal. However, only the
actions that the Lord performs with the help of His spiritual potency are eternal,
and the actions that the Lord performs with the help of His material potencies and
material time are not eternal, for if the Lord's creation of the material universes
were eternal then the eventual dissolution of the universes could not occur.
Adhikaraṇa 6
Meditation on the Lord's Qualities
Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Now the author of the sūtras discusses the following point. In the Vedānta
scriptures the Lord's blissfulness and other transcendental qualities are all

described.
Saṁśaya (doubt): Should all the qualities of the Lord be combined together in
the devotees' meditation, or should they not be combined in that way?
Pūrvapakṣa (the opponent speaks): The qualities of the Lord should not be
combined in meditation, for there is not evidence to say that this should be done.
Because it is not said in scripture that all the qualities of the Lord should be
combined in meditation, therefore they should not be so combined.
Siddhānta (conclusion): In the following words the author of the sūtras gives
His conclusion.
Sūtra 12
ānandādayaḥ pradhānasya
ānanda—bliss; ādayaḥ—beginning with; pradhānasya—of the Supreme.
Of the Supreme those qualities that begin with bliss.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The transcendental qualities of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, such as
His bliss and knowledge, and His paternal affection for they who take shelter of
Him, are all described in the Śruti-śāstra. These qualities should all be combined in
the devotees' meditation, for all together they increase the devotees' thirst to attain
the Lord.
Adhikaraṇa 7
The Supreme Lord Is Full of Bliss
Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa

विषयः — श्रुतिशास्त्रेषु प्रतिपादितं यत् परब्रह्म परमपुरुषः आनन्दमयः अस्ति, तस्य शिरः प्रभृत्यवयवाः अपि दिव्यपरमानन्दस्वरूपाः सन्ति। तैत्तिरीयोपनिषदि (२.५.१) उक्तम् —
श्रुतिः — «तस्य प्रियमेव शिरः»
हिन्दी-अनुवादः — "परमपुरुषः भगवान् पक्षिरूपेण कल्पितः, यस्य प्रियमेव मस्तकम् अस्ति।"
संशयः — किं भगवतः एते प्रियशिरस्त्वादि-धर्माः सर्वासु उपासनासु अनुचिन्तनीयाः, अथवा न अनुचिन्तनीयाः?
पूर्वपक्षः — पूर्वस्मिन् अधिकरणे सिद्धं यत् आनन्दादयः ब्रह्मधर्माः सर्वविद्यासु उपसंहर्तव्याः। तैत्तिरीयोपनिषदि प्रतिपादितं 'प्रियम्' अपि आनन्दादभिन्नमेव, अतः प्रियशिरस्त्वादि-धर्माः अपि सर्वासु भगवदुपासनासु संगृह्येरन्।
सिद्धान्तः — अस्य परिहारार्थं सूत्रकारः भगवान् बादरायणः आह —
सूत्रम् १३
प्रियशिरस्त्वाद्यप्राप्तिरुपचयापचयौ हि भेदे ॥ १३ ॥
पदविभागः एवं पदार्थः —
प्रिय — सुखम्, आनन्दः ; शिरः — मस्तकम् ; त्वादि — शिरस्त्व-प्रभृतयः धर्माः ;
अप्राप्तिः — सर्वासु उपासनासु अननुवृत्तिः (न उपसंहारः) ;
उपचय-अपचयौ — वृद्धिः ह्रासः च ; हि — यतः ; भेदे — अङ्गाङ्गिभेदे अथवा अवयवभेदे सति ॥
सूत्रार्थः (हिन्दी अनुवाद) — प्रियशिरस्त्वादि-धर्माणां सर्वविद्यासु उपसंहारो न भवति, यतो हि अवयवभेदे सति उपचयः (वृद्धिः) अपचयः (ह्रासः) च प्रसज्येत।
श्रील-बलदेव-विद्याभूषण-विरचित-गोविन्दभाष्यस्य तात्पर्यम् —
भगवतः शिरः प्रियस्वरूपम्, दक्षिणपक्षः मोदः, उत्तरपक्षः प्रमोदः इत्यादयः रूपाः सर्वासु उपासनासु न उपसंहर्तव्याः।
सच्चिदानन्दघनः श्रीभगवान् विष्णुः वस्तुतः नराकार-स्वरूपः अस्ति, न तु पक्षिस्वरूपः (यथा तैत्तिरीयोपनिषदः अस्मिन् प्रकरणे रूपकत्वेन कथितम्)।
अपि च, तैत्तिरीयोपनिषदि वर्णितः अयं पक्षि-सङ्कल्पः केवलं बुद्धेः सुगमावबोधाय कल्पितः, न तु परमार्थतः ब्रह्मणः स्वरूपभेदः।